For many guitarists (and not just in ITM) the acquisition of a quality acoustic guitar is a landmark in their musical development. The sound and playability of the chosen instrument will inevitably affect their style over time, and many guitarists develop a strong emotional attachment to a favourite instrument.
Fundamental choices need to be made, as I have indicated above. A hand-made instrument from a good maker will hopefully get the very best out of the (hand-picked) materials used, and provide a unique sound.....or maybe not, if things don't quite work out. Commissioning your own guitar is always a risk.
At the very high end, there is a very short list of names to choose from - arguably Martin, Gibson, Guild, Taylor and Lowden (do Lowdens count as hand-made too?), I've restricted the list to five, and it's just my opinion. In this case are you to some extent paying for a name, and would a good model of an "inferior" brand sound just as well?
Buying a new guitar, you are sure that everything is in full working order and that the instrument hasn't been abused. However, sometimes it takes years and a lot of playing to fully develop the tone, so a quality used instrument is worth considering - indeed good vintage guitars attract the highest prices of all.
I'd love to read anyone else's opinions on the above - if you had (say) €2,500 or so to spend on a guitar, what would you buy (and why?)? - yes, if you decide not to spend up to the limit you can have an ice cream as well!
Honours question - as above, but €5,000 to spend.........
I see you Joe Foley guitars so you probably know more about this than you let on! Have you looked at Chris Larkins guitars from Kerry?
At €2,500 the guitars should all sound and play well and plenty of less well know factory guitars would compete on those terms with the major manufacturers. In my opinion Martins, Taylors et all have a better resale because of the the brand name.
There are workshop/small factories like Santa Cruz and Collings that are hard to beat and it you get a good second hand one they are great value. Take a look at the shops on the south cost of England http://www.theacousticmusicco.co.uk/ and http://www.guitarjunction.co.uk/ as they sometimes have these.
Handbuilt guitars in the USA tend to kick off about $3,000 to $4000 and then upwards - so you might just make it with €2,500. The guitars I've seen that really impressed me and don't have a long waiting list are Circa Guitars and The Nashville Guitar Company. That said there are tons of others turning out really smashing guitars. They offer the best if you really know what sort of guitar you want as they can indulge different body witdh, string spacing etc etc.
Good luck and what's wrong with the Joe Foley guitars you have. Let me know if you want to buy an old Lowden - I'm in Dublin too so you can have a look at it if you want.
In US... for really, really small hand builders, that are incredible, Ed Foley (not related to Joe) www.foleyguitars.com, though admittedly they are very pricey, but are amazing.
and Frank Finocchio in Easton PA. Frank is my teacher, I have built three with him, all amazing.... I am striking out on my own for the next one, feel I know what I am doing finally. He will build for sale too, prices depend on wood, inlay, etc.
i looked for the dream guitar all my life, and never found perfection until I built my own.
So, if you're a real guitar nut, take the $2500 and build your own with Frank Finocchio! The guitar you build would easily sell for over $3000. It is a seven day in a row course, you leave without a finish, no time. Currently I have my last one apart for french polishing, and missing it....!
Stephan Sobel guitars, which sell for about £7000. Probably the best acoustic guitars in the world (his 3 year waiting list would suggest they're popular, at least, used by Martin Simpson among others!) I see the advantage of getting a guitar from a luthier as opposed to a guitar company, you can choose the woods, the guitar shape, the neck relief, string spacing and as many other options as you like. And there's more recourse to take it back to the maker until it's perfect. Also, it's possible to get really good deals from unknown makers, factory guitars tend to be more expensive in relation to popularity.
With regard to the wood settling in thing, what I've been told is in the long run the same cost of Spruce and Cedar will eventually sound about the same, but cedar doesn't need as much "playing in" as the spruce. But it is a darker (and slightly less attractive) wood.
I'd quite like a Docherty or a Foster(~£3000), I've played both and I thought they sounded and felt beautiful.
Anyway, to me it's cool to walk into a session an pull out a guitar from a maker no-ones ever heard of, and don't know exactly how much your guitar is worth - people judge you by your playing not your instrument. Much as I liked the Fylde I once played, I reckoned I could get a better guitar for the same money elsewhere. Perhaps someone would like to lend me a Lowden?!?
PS.... for a low priced great guitar, try the Blueridges, they stand up to most any new Martin. They play well and are well made. Available on Ebay, but go for three numbers like BR168 rather than BR68. The two digit ones are laminate.
I know two people that got the laminates, not realizing though and they sound great too.
I play a 1991-vintage Santa Cruz OM that I've had since '92. It's the berries. A perfect size to hold, it's loud w/o being overbearing (I'm sometimes overbearing personally), records and blends into small ensembles well. It suits my personality and it's really all the guitar I need. But if I were going to replace it as my only guitar, I'd either go for an identical new model or a Circa. I met John Slobog, Circa Guitars, this past summer, and his guitars are just amazing, exquisite, perfect. They have the aesthetic of a pre-war Martin, but they are built as fine as Stradivarius violins. (They'd better be for $4500 U.S.) But perhaps much too nice for a raucous session! For those, I'd go for a nice Lowden, a Taylor (Taylors are not handmade, BTW) or Larrivee, or even a small-bodied Martin. There are other fine guitars, of course (e.g., Bourgeois, Collins, etc.), but the best way to make a choice is to find a good guitar shop that carries several good lines and can provide a place to sit and strum w/o pressure.
Unless you are playing at a master level and in situations where it makes a difference as to the tonality and aesthetics of a really find instrument, I don't think It really matters if at least parts of an instrument are machine-made vs. handmade. The former, like how the neck of a Taylor is made, means a consistent form at a good price. Handmade instruments are things of beauty, but I've seen professional handmade instruments get beat up badly on the road, and that seems like a bit of a waste. And old instruments are not better than new instruments. We're in a Golden Age of guitar-making, and the best new instruments are much finer than 90 percent of older instruments.
Basically, there are "name" brand guitars, boutique guitars, and the odd vintage guitar that really sounds good (from age and quality of wood, not necessarily construction). A brand name is sometimes a guarantor of quality, sometimes not. And even the sound of identical models and brands can vary betweenindividual instruments. The beauty (and expense) of a boutique instrument (i.e., handmade by a luthier in a small operation) is that often the top and bracings are voiced, and the choices of woods and detail can vary to the customers' tastes.
And then there's the setup. A handmade instrument needs a proper setup and maintenance just as much as a lesser guitar, and a good setup can make all the difference in the world even with a lesser instrument. And then there's the choice of pick, strings, amplification, etc.
I'd like to put in a plug for Santa Cruz guitars. I play a Vintage Artist model which has a spruce top and mahogony back and sides. I feel that the mahogony provide nice balance and projection for ITRAD.
High Strung... I agree... and the hand makers will work with you and work with you until the guitar feels just right....assuming you go in person to pick your new baby up. These guys (and girls..I know a few) not only want to sell a guitar, they love the guitar from day one, they care for it like a newborn... you'd almost think they were a surrogate mother for it! They remember just about every guitar they ever made, they glow when you bring it back for a visit or adjustment, then they are sad to see it leave again. That's how much some of these people care. They want you to have it be perfect.
My first really handmade guitar was by Ed Foley. I bought three of them eventually. I just sold one M size because I just built an M size and actually like it better, just a hair. I showed Ed Foley the guitar and he offered me a job on and off helping him out, making braces, doing idiot work, whatever.... I think I may just do it after the next guitar I build. it will be great to learn more.
To see both Foley and Frank Finocchio lovingly gurgle over their wooden children (yes FINOCCHIO is his real name!!! what a name for a woodworker) and send them off to good homes, well it just shows the level of care put into the making of the guitar that you will never get in a factory.
There are certainly some fine hand-made guitars about now, and if you can play before you buy, and it suits you, than you know what you are getting. Ordering a special from someone whose work you already appreciate should not carry too much risk of disappointment.
On the other hand, an old guitar should already be well played-in and sounding as it should, and you have the opportunity to choose the one that's developed against the one that hasn't matured as well; I've seen this in both Martins and Guilds - in a shop in North Carolina they had a D18 and a D28, both at the same price; the D18 sang, while the other was a block of wood. I met a lady playing an O17 at the weekend, almost the same as my OO17, but not a patch on it. I've brought back more than one Guild from the US, but only kept one as most satisfying to play, and was content to sell the others on to appreciative musicians.
I have a custom guitar by John Greven, made just for me in 1977, and it's been thru hell and back. It's been stolen and returned (how rare is -that-!?!) and had a new top, all kinds of repairs over the years. Not because it was poorly built, but it just has a LOT of miles on it.
I ordered a bouzouki from Phil Crump and I love it. My main guitar is a Santa Cruz OM PW and I really enjoy it. I was very lucky to find it the way it was... It had been in a shop for almost a year, regularly played but never purchased, so it was perfectly in a lightly played-in condition when I got it.
New or old, production or luthier custom... tough question, except for the cost... I'd love to have a really beat-up Lowden 010, or a less beat-up 023. I've had a couple of lovely, pristine newer (used) Lowdens and they were too nice for me. I'd like to hear a McIlroy, I'd like a short-scale cedar/mahogany Santa Cruz OM.
I like used guitars, I like the ... mobility, in that I worry less about damaging them, and I feel confident of being able to repair them, and I feel good about selling them again if they don't suit me, and it's great fun to do a couple of upgrades or repairs and pass one on in better condition than I got it.
But custom stuff is a big deal, a big event when one is delivered and one gets to see how all the ideas and collaboration work out. And, of course, it never does - right away -... it takes a good stretch of time to find out what it will really be. A great thrill, that.
Let's see... 2500 Euros is about 3200 U.S. dollars...
Well, first I'd be more tempted to find an octave mandolin than a guitar just now, but that's another can of worms, as is, "I'd spend it to stay in Ireland as long as I could with the instruments I already have... " <GGG> OK...
Off-the-rack...
Another Santa Cruz OM, the short-scale cedar/mahogany OM PW... Maybe a cedar/walnut McIlroy or the right used Lowden, or a Bourgeois JOMC.
For the high-Euro-mark one... I'm pretty sure that I'd not spend that much on an instrument on my own... I don't like 'collector' pieces, I like 'working' instruments without a lot of decor. I'd want to buy a Foley zouk and wait for it in Ireland... <GG>
Or, I might buy a used Sobell at that price. Or a Sobell mandolin, or... several used instruments.
I just realized that I don't know who I'd commission to build an instrument for that money... Probably not a guitar... Interesting...
The best guitar player that I personally know tells me that the D-18GE is the best Martin being made today. He has one, and he also really likes the Santa Cruz, which is what another great guitar-playing friend has.
On the other hand, a good used, well played guitar is hard to beat, unless you are set on getting a new one. A used guitar that is in good condition is a known commodity. You don't have to guess as to how it will sound when it's broken in, or how much you will lose if you have to sell it.
Random ponderings-things to consider when buying your “axe”
1-Cosmetics
“Cosmetics” IE inlay’s and fancy stuff greatly increase the cost but do not enhance the playability and sound. Are you paying for cosmetics ? Do you want too? Simply said-it is a good idea to know what you are paying for. A simply appointed guitar may be cost the same as the fancier one but it will probably sound, relatively speaking, better.
2-Tone-woods
The relative scarcity of top-grade planks made out of certain sought after woods (Brazilian rosewood, Adirondack spruce for example) can make the instrument many times more costly than a similar model with lower graded woods. Two guitars may look almost identical and be built from the same wood species, but one may be considerably higher in cost if the wood is of higher grade. Presumably it will sound better.
Two guitars make look almost identical and be made of similar species, but one is made of, say the relatively common Sitka spruce, and the other is say Adirondack Spruce. You will pay more for the scarcer wood. It may or may not be the same grade of wood, however, and it may or may not sound better.
3-Your ear
When comparing two guitars of made of similar (but different grades) of tone woods (with all cosmetics aside) let’s say one costs 1000 euro and one costs 2500 euro. I assert if you blindfolded most guitar players, they could not tell you which was which. Guitarists by nature, would never admit this, of course. Even if you could hear the difference you then have to ask yourself if its really that much better sounding to justify the cost. Hearing the “quality” difference in a 300 euro and 1000 euro guitar is another matter (even I can hear that difference!) If you can’t hear the “quality” difference between a 1000 euro guitar and a 2500 euro one what’s the point of buying the more expensive one? Are you hearing quality or are you hearing what you like or what you percieve as quality?
4-Your skill level.
A great player can make a fair guitar sound great. A great guitar will never make a fair player sound great. Bottom line, the time it takes you to earn the money to pay off the 1500 extra euros you spent on a “great” guitar, who's sound you aren't qualified to evaluate might be better off spent practicing.
5-Bottom Line
Play a hundred guitars, play as many of the model you like as you can, 'cos they are not created equal. Listen to them, buy the one YOU like.
There are soooo many ways of looking at this. Fingerstyle or flat pick? Mainly for recording? Mainly for playing for small audiences? With a pickup? For your one solitary enjoyment? These all have different requirements and not many guitars are optimal for all of these applications.
Is it more important for the guitar to sound great or to play great? I'll sacrifice some of the voice for an axe that feels good to play. I start with the dimensions that work for me (body style, neck thickness and width, string spacing at the nut and bridge, etc.) and *then* listen to the sound. Sometimes an instrument with a spectacular voice will tend to amplify your subtle little weaknesses. I like a voice that lets me dig in without sounding brutal. If a guitar puts out a gourgeous tone, but it's the same gourgeous tone no matter what you do, I don't like that. I like a broad tonal pallette to work with and I don't mind working a little for the tone. Even cheap guitars usually have a nice voice somewhere in them that you can find if you get personal with the instrument.
I've found nice variations on the qualities I look for in lots of different brand names and small names. You just have to try as many as you can. Some of my friends build a pretty good guitar - Kent Everett, David Morris...
Problem with me, I love WAY too many of them, I have GAS, real bad!
They are all so different and you can like one for something and not for another. Some for live playing and some for recording. Some for backing, some for fingerstyle. Big ones, small ones, travel ones, dreads, OMs, Ms, parlors, cutaways. Rosewood ones.... and one of each of course... Indian, Brazilian, Honduran rosewood. Sitka tops, Adirondack, Engleman. Mahogony, koa.... oh it can become a real nightmare....!
And then.... I have heard mahogony guitars, that with the right bracing can sound better than a Brazilian. I chose an Indian Rosewood Foley over a Brazilian, same model, because the Indian actually sounded better, so a lot is in the making also.
If you work with a luthier and want punch and balance, they may NOT scallop the braces.... OMG, i thought ALL braces these days had to be scalloped. Sacrilege. Foleys have a lot of punch too, he often will not scallop unless it's requested. You can do it after on the inside though if you don't like the sound.
My most recent building experience was with Honduran rosewood and Italian Alpine spruce top. I didn't want it too bassey, but wanted punch and projection, a great backing guitar that can easily go fingerstyle too. It's an M size, modified. like a slightly larger OM. My teacher said not to scallop the braces, seemed scary, though I got just what I wanted, it's amazing. an experienced builder will know the woods and give you just what you want. And it's a great experience too, to have someone build you a guitar to your exact taste, make it play like a dream and sound great.
Honduran rosewood is the new "Brazilian" at a fraction of the price, just as beautiful too. It is a warm deep sounding wood. Some say better than Brazilian, and having played it against Brazilians it is true. So you don't have to spend a fortune on woods if you go the handmade route. A great back/side set of Honduran just cost me $110. That's it. Comparable Brazilian can cost into the thousands. It has the same properties. Acacia is like Koa only a lot less too if you like that. Walnut, a way underused wood is deep and warm and just gorgeous to look at.... back and sides, just $45 a set. Of course the main expense is in the building and the builder's experience and reputation, but it doesn't hurt to know the cost of the woods going into a guitar and be knowledgable as to their tonal properties when talking to a builder.
So get to know the woods and their tonal properties and talk to several builders.... that's what I would do on a $2000-3500 budget for something great. There are quite a few who would build in that range, there are many small hand builders that would welcome an order in that range. You can also buy the wood yourself and bring it over..... or maybe a maple fell in your yard! I am waiting for a maple or black walnut tree to provide me with a guitar one day.... how wonderful would that be? If it's dried enough a luthier can make the back and sides from it. I know someone who did this with a maple in his yard, gorgeous instrument.
I wouldn't counsel anyone to go w/ Brazilian Rosewood, unless you're a collector and you pay extra into some kind of conservation fund. BR has been on the protected species lists for a while, and the BR coming into luthiers' hands now is stump wood. SR is fine in the right hands, but you're paying more for the mystique of BR than anything. I'm not convinced that the tonality is worth the extra cost (and it can be half the price of a new handmade instrument). Some of the alternative woods are both gorgeous in sound and appearance--cocobolo is a good candidate, and I love the sound of mahogany guitars.
A good luthier is more likely to scallop at least some braces than not, and the best "voice" their guitars by variations in the thickness of the top and braces. A heavily-built guitar (no scalloping) will be strong and able to be played hard with medium or heavy strings, but a lightly-built guitar will be more sonorous and louder for less effort, although you can't string it with heavy strings. The best luthiers will build the instrument to your playing style with variations on the thickness of the top and bracing, whereas the bigger production shops tend to build their instruments on the heavy side so as to reduce the chance of a guitar coming back for repair work (e.g., bridge pulling up, warping, etc.). (I have to wonder if Foley builds his guitars with small, unscalloped braces vs. large scalloped ones.)
Another factor to consider is that you can have old or used guitars revoiced. I had two braces on my Santa Cruz OM shaved down by an experienced luthier, and it really made a significant impact on the sound of my guitar. It was hard to believe that it could sound better, but it really does. This can be done to old guitars (and probably should for many of them). As far as "breaking in" goes, a new guitar will settle in and open up as a function of how much it's played. If it's a good brand with good materials and workmanship, it will improve with age and playing--and if you don't care for it, you can have it revoiced (this is done with fiddles all the time), or you can sell it.
I think that in the end, unless you know exactly what you want in a handmade guitar, it's probably best to stay with a known brand so if and when you trade up, you don't lose its value. Santa Cruz OM PWs are some of the best affordable handmade guitars going, and the size is perfect for ITM. But each to his own.
I agree on the Brazilian, I know (Ed) Foley has some real old stock ... he will also do the braces anyway you want or according to the sounbd you want, and some he has revoiced later. Some will just thin the brace rather than scallop too. His back braces are pretty big and more of a bowl created. He scalloped on a guitar for me (not made by him) and improved the tone a lot.
What I mean is that you can say you ultimately want this or that quality of sound, not tell the builder to scallop or not, they should know. I knew if I didn't get the sound I liked we could scallop afterwards.
I recently saw an Oregon myrtlewood guitar that was really nice too, that's not so pricey either.
i think it's nice to have at least one really great guitar custom or not that suits you, and one easy to play and decent sounding knocker, that you don't care if someone you let use at a session give it a ding or pours beer on it.
The Brazilian, I hear you can't cut it anymore, you have to get a tree that fell on its own and they are airlifted out. The honduran to my ear and eye is every bit as good. Depends too, there can be a bad cut of this or that, like I mentioned I have played Indian up against brazilian and liked the Indian guitar better. The Indian rosewood is really nice too, there is this mytique about Brazilian and they price it accordingly..... It certainly isn't worth a few thousand extra to my ears, though may be to some. One of my favorites is a walnut OM. It's got the warmth and depth you'd expect from rosewood.
Braz rosewood is definitely a wonderful tonewood, but will usually cost you $Thousands extra. And it still might not be the sound that YOU want.
As Iris said, walnut is a great tonewood. Every walnut guitar I've played had a very nice voice. So far, my impression is that it tends to sound somewhere between rosewood and mahogany. I think the main reason we don't see many commercial walnut guitars is just appearance - it's not as striking as rosewood and not as comfortably familiar as mahagony.
One of my luthier buddies has had oak back and sides put together for years, but keeps putting off finishing it. That'll be an interesting experiment. I don't think I've ever met an oak guitar, but I've heard of a couple that allegedly sound great.
Figured Claro Walnut.... incredibly beautiful, undulates when polished, like a waterfall..... amazing, I think a nice piece is more striking than any rosewood.
Nice warm sound, not as deep as Brazilian or other rosewoods, just perfect balance in my ears!
Does the choice of wood for the back and sides have that much effect on the tone? Given the fact that they're damped against the player's body and can't vibrate, can it make that much difference to the sound? I would have thought the bigger issue would be the bracing, cutaway (if it has one) etc? Or does mahogany have a different strength (per mm thickness) to rosewood, so you need more (or less)? Just interested, I don't make guitars.
The top is the most important, but I have consistently heard more depth and resonance from rosewoods than mahogony. So it you want bright and out there sound mahogony is better. More brittle, less warm, and you don't maybe always want warm and deep sound.... so you have to have many, LOL! at least that's my excuse!
There are many other factors too though besides bracing, and I am no expert yet, having just made three, but things like body depth will add warmth and deep tone too. I heard one mahogony Dread made by Ed Foley that was deep bodied, with a very thin top of engleman and eyes closed would have taken it for rosewood. But for the generic built models, the standard OMs, 000s, Dreads compared one against the other, I can pick rosewood as opposed to mahogany eyes closed pretty much most of the time.
Walnut is a little different, somewhere in the middle. Best of both worlds, really cheap most of the time, and a pretty wood. The top makes the biggest difference though, which is why many laminate back and side guitars sound so good too. Not sure what wood is used consistently in between the veneers but it sure isn't Brazilian. I'll have to find out, just curious, maybe some cheap grade mahogony or something. Interesting question. I don't plan on building any laminates so never gave it a thought.
I don't think that the choice of wood for the sides and back are as critical as to whether they're solid or plywood. Yes, some ply-sided guitars can sound pretty good if the top is a good one (I have a classical guitar w/ a cedar top and beautiful ply sides and back that sounds great), but an all-solid wood instrument will more likely sound better over time than a ply instrument.
That said, I think most luthiers would say that the choice of woods for the back and sides is fairly influential on the final tone of the instrument, and that the dimensions, quality, and distribution of braces and the quality and thickness of the top are the major determinants of both tone and volume. However, larger is not always better. I would choose the dimensions of my instrument based on its intended use--that is, a smaller guitar tends to blend in well in a parlor-like acoustic setting, whereas a larger guitar would sound good among louder instruments and settings. But ultimately, each to his or her own. There are few hard and fast rules in the guitar world!
I've played literally hundreds of mahogany and rosewood guitars - enough to conclude that there's a fairly consistent difference. But the other things mentioned above - body shape and size, bracing, top thickness, top wood, etc. - usually make a bigger difference.
I've been away for a while and have just read through all the responses briefly - thanks a million to all who responded to my original post and in such detail!!
To those of you who asked - what's wrong with my (Joe) Foley guitars? Nothing, is the answer. Sometimes you get used to an instrument and fancy a change, there's also the Nirvana syndrome where you are looking for the ultimate guitar.
I've been through the "design your own guitar" stage - Joe built one to my specifications (spruce top, Brazilian rosewood back and sides) and it's a lovely guitar, but for ITM my original Foley (built 1988) is still unsurpassed. It just reaches places other guitars don't (particularly in its bass response). The truth is I am spoilt - my "other" acoustic guitar is a Guild D30 which is pretty nice too!!
Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
For many guitarists (and not just in ITM) the acquisition of a quality acoustic guitar is a landmark in their musical development. The sound and playability of the chosen instrument will inevitably affect their style over time, and many guitarists develop a strong emotional attachment to a favourite instrument.
Fundamental choices need to be made, as I have indicated above. A hand-made instrument from a good maker will hopefully get the very best out of the (hand-picked) materials used, and provide a unique sound.....or maybe not, if things don't quite work out. Commissioning your own guitar is always a risk.
At the very high end, there is a very short list of names to choose from - arguably Martin, Gibson, Guild, Taylor and Lowden (do Lowdens count as hand-made too?), I've restricted the list to five, and it's just my opinion. In this case are you to some extent paying for a name, and would a good model of an "inferior" brand sound just as well?
Buying a new guitar, you are sure that everything is in full working order and that the instrument hasn't been abused. However, sometimes it takes years and a lot of playing to fully develop the tone, so a quality used instrument is worth considering - indeed good vintage guitars attract the highest prices of all.
I'd love to read anyone else's opinions on the above - if you had (say) €2,500 or so to spend on a guitar, what would you buy (and why?)? - yes, if you decide not to spend up to the limit you can have an ice cream as well!
Honours question - as above, but €5,000 to spend.........
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by lysaghtm
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
I see you Joe Foley guitars so you probably know more about this than you let on! Have you looked at Chris Larkins guitars from Kerry?
At €2,500 the guitars should all sound and play well and plenty of less well know factory guitars would compete on those terms with the major manufacturers. In my opinion Martins, Taylors et all have a better resale because of the the brand name.
There are workshop/small factories like Santa Cruz and Collings that are hard to beat and it you get a good second hand one they are great value. Take a look at the shops on the south cost of England http://www.theacousticmusicco.co.uk/ and http://www.guitarjunction.co.uk/ as they sometimes have these.
Handbuilt guitars in the USA tend to kick off about $3,000 to $4000 and then upwards - so you might just make it with €2,500. The guitars I've seen that really impressed me and don't have a long waiting list are Circa Guitars and The Nashville Guitar Company. That said there are tons of others turning out really smashing guitars. They offer the best if you really know what sort of guitar you want as they can indulge different body witdh, string spacing etc etc.
Good luck and what's wrong with the Joe Foley guitars you have. Let me know if you want to buy an old Lowden - I'm in Dublin too so you can have a look at it if you want.
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by Cuso
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
First question - Lowden or Fylde!
Honours question - Lowden or Fylde!
Keith
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by ocarolan
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
In US... for really, really small hand builders, that are incredible, Ed Foley (not related to Joe) www.foleyguitars.com, though admittedly they are very pricey, but are amazing.
and Frank Finocchio in Easton PA. Frank is my teacher, I have built three with him, all amazing.... I am striking out on my own for the next one, feel I know what I am doing finally. He will build for sale too, prices depend on wood, inlay, etc.
i looked for the dream guitar all my life, and never found perfection until I built my own.
So, if you're a real guitar nut, take the $2500 and build your own with Frank Finocchio! The guitar you build would easily sell for over $3000. It is a seven day in a row course, you leave without a finish, no time. Currently I have my last one apart for french polishing, and missing it....!
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Stephan Sobel guitars, which sell for about £7000. Probably the best acoustic guitars in the world (his 3 year waiting list would suggest they're popular, at least, used by Martin Simpson among others!) I see the advantage of getting a guitar from a luthier as opposed to a guitar company, you can choose the woods, the guitar shape, the neck relief, string spacing and as many other options as you like. And there's more recourse to take it back to the maker until it's perfect. Also, it's possible to get really good deals from unknown makers, factory guitars tend to be more expensive in relation to popularity.
With regard to the wood settling in thing, what I've been told is in the long run the same cost of Spruce and Cedar will eventually sound about the same, but cedar doesn't need as much "playing in" as the spruce. But it is a darker (and slightly less attractive) wood.
I'd quite like a Docherty or a Foster(~£3000), I've played both and I thought they sounded and felt beautiful.
Anyway, to me it's cool to walk into a session an pull out a guitar from a maker no-ones ever heard of, and don't know exactly how much your guitar is worth - people judge you by your playing not your instrument. Much as I liked the Fylde I once played, I reckoned I could get a better guitar for the same money elsewhere. Perhaps someone would like to lend me a Lowden?!?
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by Andy V
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
PS.... for a low priced great guitar, try the Blueridges, they stand up to most any new Martin. They play well and are well made. Available on Ebay, but go for three numbers like BR168 rather than BR68. The two digit ones are laminate.
I know two people that got the laminates, not realizing though and they sound great too.
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
I play a 1991-vintage Santa Cruz OM that I've had since '92. It's the berries. A perfect size to hold, it's loud w/o being overbearing (I'm sometimes overbearing personally), records and blends into small ensembles well. It suits my personality and it's really all the guitar I need. But if I were going to replace it as my only guitar, I'd either go for an identical new model or a Circa. I met John Slobog, Circa Guitars, this past summer, and his guitars are just amazing, exquisite, perfect. They have the aesthetic of a pre-war Martin, but they are built as fine as Stradivarius violins. (They'd better be for $4500 U.S.) But perhaps much too nice for a raucous session! For those, I'd go for a nice Lowden, a Taylor (Taylors are not handmade, BTW) or Larrivee, or even a small-bodied Martin. There are other fine guitars, of course (e.g., Bourgeois, Collins, etc.), but the best way to make a choice is to find a good guitar shop that carries several good lines and can provide a place to sit and strum w/o pressure.
Unless you are playing at a master level and in situations where it makes a difference as to the tonality and aesthetics of a really find instrument, I don't think It really matters if at least parts of an instrument are machine-made vs. handmade. The former, like how the neck of a Taylor is made, means a consistent form at a good price. Handmade instruments are things of beauty, but I've seen professional handmade instruments get beat up badly on the road, and that seems like a bit of a waste. And old instruments are not better than new instruments. We're in a Golden Age of guitar-making, and the best new instruments are much finer than 90 percent of older instruments.
Basically, there are "name" brand guitars, boutique guitars, and the odd vintage guitar that really sounds good (from age and quality of wood, not necessarily construction). A brand name is sometimes a guarantor of quality, sometimes not. And even the sound of identical models and brands can vary betweenindividual instruments. The beauty (and expense) of a boutique instrument (i.e., handmade by a luthier in a small operation) is that often the top and bracings are voiced, and the choices of woods and detail can vary to the customers' tastes.
And then there's the setup. A handmade instrument needs a proper setup and maintenance just as much as a lesser guitar, and a good setup can make all the difference in the world even with a lesser instrument. And then there's the choice of pick, strings, amplification, etc.
Simple, eh?
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by Audeamus
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
I'd like to put in a plug for Santa Cruz guitars. I play a Vintage Artist model which has a spruce top and mahogony back and sides. I feel that the mahogony provide nice balance and projection for ITRAD.
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by irishrhythm
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Gibsons are wonderful guitars. High-end Martins are good too. Acutally, if you can get an old Martin D-18, that's the nicest guitar ever.
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by Zazzaliss
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
High Strung... I agree... and the hand makers will work with you and work with you until the guitar feels just right....assuming you go in person to pick your new baby up. These guys (and girls..I know a few) not only want to sell a guitar, they love the guitar from day one, they care for it like a newborn... you'd almost think they were a surrogate mother for it! They remember just about every guitar they ever made, they glow when you bring it back for a visit or adjustment, then they are sad to see it leave again. That's how much some of these people care. They want you to have it be perfect.
My first really handmade guitar was by Ed Foley. I bought three of them eventually. I just sold one M size because I just built an M size and actually like it better, just a hair. I showed Ed Foley the guitar and he offered me a job on and off helping him out, making braces, doing idiot work, whatever.... I think I may just do it after the next guitar I build. it will be great to learn more.
To see both Foley and Frank Finocchio lovingly gurgle over their wooden children (yes FINOCCHIO is his real name!!! what a name for a woodworker) and send them off to good homes, well it just shows the level of care put into the making of the guitar that you will never get in a factory.
# Posted on August 30th 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
There are certainly some fine hand-made guitars about now, and if you can play before you buy, and it suits you, than you know what you are getting. Ordering a special from someone whose work you already appreciate should not carry too much risk of disappointment.
On the other hand, an old guitar should already be well played-in and sounding as it should, and you have the opportunity to choose the one that's developed against the one that hasn't matured as well; I've seen this in both Martins and Guilds - in a shop in North Carolina they had a D18 and a D28, both at the same price; the D18 sang, while the other was a block of wood. I met a lady playing an O17 at the weekend, almost the same as my OO17, but not a patch on it. I've brought back more than one Guild from the US, but only kept one as most satisfying to play, and was content to sell the others on to appreciative musicians.
# Posted on August 31st 2006 by Guernsey Pete
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
I have a custom guitar by John Greven, made just for me in 1977, and it's been thru hell and back. It's been stolen and returned (how rare is -that-!?!) and had a new top, all kinds of repairs over the years. Not because it was poorly built, but it just has a LOT of miles on it.
I ordered a bouzouki from Phil Crump and I love it. My main guitar is a Santa Cruz OM PW and I really enjoy it. I was very lucky to find it the way it was... It had been in a shop for almost a year, regularly played but never purchased, so it was perfectly in a lightly played-in condition when I got it.
New or old, production or luthier custom... tough question, except for the cost... I'd love to have a really beat-up Lowden 010, or a less beat-up 023. I've had a couple of lovely, pristine newer (used) Lowdens and they were too nice for me. I'd like to hear a McIlroy, I'd like a short-scale cedar/mahogany Santa Cruz OM.
I like used guitars, I like the ... mobility, in that I worry less about damaging them, and I feel confident of being able to repair them, and I feel good about selling them again if they don't suit me, and it's great fun to do a couple of upgrades or repairs and pass one on in better condition than I got it.
But custom stuff is a big deal, a big event when one is delivered and one gets to see how all the ideas and collaboration work out. And, of course, it never does - right away -... it takes a good stretch of time to find out what it will really be. A great thrill, that.
Let's see... 2500 Euros is about 3200 U.S. dollars...
Well, first I'd be more tempted to find an octave mandolin than a guitar just now, but that's another can of worms, as is, "I'd spend it to stay in Ireland as long as I could with the instruments I already have... " <GGG> OK...
Off-the-rack...
Another Santa Cruz OM, the short-scale cedar/mahogany OM PW... Maybe a cedar/walnut McIlroy or the right used Lowden, or a Bourgeois JOMC.
For the high-Euro-mark one... I'm pretty sure that I'd not spend that much on an instrument on my own... I don't like 'collector' pieces, I like 'working' instruments without a lot of decor. I'd want to buy a Foley zouk and wait for it in Ireland... <GG>
Or, I might buy a used Sobell at that price. Or a Sobell mandolin, or... several used instruments.
I just realized that I don't know who I'd commission to build an instrument for that money... Probably not a guitar... Interesting...
Nice question, thanks!
stv
http://cdbaby.com/Culchies
# Posted on August 31st 2006 by stv culchie
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
The best guitar player that I personally know tells me that the D-18GE is the best Martin being made today. He has one, and he also really likes the Santa Cruz, which is what another great guitar-playing friend has.
On the other hand, a good used, well played guitar is hard to beat, unless you are set on getting a new one. A used guitar that is in good condition is a known commodity. You don't have to guess as to how it will sound when it's broken in, or how much you will lose if you have to sell it.
# Posted on August 31st 2006 by griffith
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Random ponderings-things to consider when buying your “axe”
1-Cosmetics
“Cosmetics” IE inlay’s and fancy stuff greatly increase the cost but do not enhance the playability and sound. Are you paying for cosmetics ? Do you want too? Simply said-it is a good idea to know what you are paying for. A simply appointed guitar may be cost the same as the fancier one but it will probably sound, relatively speaking, better.
2-Tone-woods
The relative scarcity of top-grade planks made out of certain sought after woods (Brazilian rosewood, Adirondack spruce for example) can make the instrument many times more costly than a similar model with lower graded woods. Two guitars may look almost identical and be built from the same wood species, but one may be considerably higher in cost if the wood is of higher grade. Presumably it will sound better.
Two guitars make look almost identical and be made of similar species, but one is made of, say the relatively common Sitka spruce, and the other is say Adirondack Spruce. You will pay more for the scarcer wood. It may or may not be the same grade of wood, however, and it may or may not sound better.
3-Your ear
When comparing two guitars of made of similar (but different grades) of tone woods (with all cosmetics aside) let’s say one costs 1000 euro and one costs 2500 euro. I assert if you blindfolded most guitar players, they could not tell you which was which. Guitarists by nature, would never admit this, of course. Even if you could hear the difference you then have to ask yourself if its really that much better sounding to justify the cost. Hearing the “quality” difference in a 300 euro and 1000 euro guitar is another matter (even I can hear that difference!) If you can’t hear the “quality” difference between a 1000 euro guitar and a 2500 euro one what’s the point of buying the more expensive one? Are you hearing quality or are you hearing what you like or what you percieve as quality?
4-Your skill level.
A great player can make a fair guitar sound great. A great guitar will never make a fair player sound great. Bottom line, the time it takes you to earn the money to pay off the 1500 extra euros you spent on a “great” guitar, who's sound you aren't qualified to evaluate might be better off spent practicing.
5-Bottom Line
Play a hundred guitars, play as many of the model you like as you can, 'cos they are not created equal. Listen to them, buy the one YOU like.
# Posted on September 1st 2006 by Chef Paul
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
There are soooo many ways of looking at this. Fingerstyle or flat pick? Mainly for recording? Mainly for playing for small audiences? With a pickup? For your one solitary enjoyment? These all have different requirements and not many guitars are optimal for all of these applications.
Is it more important for the guitar to sound great or to play great? I'll sacrifice some of the voice for an axe that feels good to play. I start with the dimensions that work for me (body style, neck thickness and width, string spacing at the nut and bridge, etc.) and *then* listen to the sound. Sometimes an instrument with a spectacular voice will tend to amplify your subtle little weaknesses. I like a voice that lets me dig in without sounding brutal. If a guitar puts out a gourgeous tone, but it's the same gourgeous tone no matter what you do, I don't like that. I like a broad tonal pallette to work with and I don't mind working a little for the tone. Even cheap guitars usually have a nice voice somewhere in them that you can find if you get personal with the instrument.
I've found nice variations on the qualities I look for in lots of different brand names and small names. You just have to try as many as you can. Some of my friends build a pretty good guitar - Kent Everett, David Morris...
# Posted on September 1st 2006 by Bob himself
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Problem with me, I love WAY too many of them, I have GAS, real bad!
They are all so different and you can like one for something and not for another. Some for live playing and some for recording. Some for backing, some for fingerstyle. Big ones, small ones, travel ones, dreads, OMs, Ms, parlors, cutaways. Rosewood ones.... and one of each of course... Indian, Brazilian, Honduran rosewood. Sitka tops, Adirondack, Engleman. Mahogony, koa.... oh it can become a real nightmare....!
And then.... I have heard mahogony guitars, that with the right bracing can sound better than a Brazilian. I chose an Indian Rosewood Foley over a Brazilian, same model, because the Indian actually sounded better, so a lot is in the making also.
If you work with a luthier and want punch and balance, they may NOT scallop the braces.... OMG, i thought ALL braces these days had to be scalloped. Sacrilege. Foleys have a lot of punch too, he often will not scallop unless it's requested. You can do it after on the inside though if you don't like the sound.
My most recent building experience was with Honduran rosewood and Italian Alpine spruce top. I didn't want it too bassey, but wanted punch and projection, a great backing guitar that can easily go fingerstyle too. It's an M size, modified. like a slightly larger OM. My teacher said not to scallop the braces, seemed scary, though I got just what I wanted, it's amazing. an experienced builder will know the woods and give you just what you want. And it's a great experience too, to have someone build you a guitar to your exact taste, make it play like a dream and sound great.
Honduran rosewood is the new "Brazilian" at a fraction of the price, just as beautiful too. It is a warm deep sounding wood. Some say better than Brazilian, and having played it against Brazilians it is true. So you don't have to spend a fortune on woods if you go the handmade route. A great back/side set of Honduran just cost me $110. That's it. Comparable Brazilian can cost into the thousands. It has the same properties. Acacia is like Koa only a lot less too if you like that. Walnut, a way underused wood is deep and warm and just gorgeous to look at.... back and sides, just $45 a set. Of course the main expense is in the building and the builder's experience and reputation, but it doesn't hurt to know the cost of the woods going into a guitar and be knowledgable as to their tonal properties when talking to a builder.
So get to know the woods and their tonal properties and talk to several builders.... that's what I would do on a $2000-3500 budget for something great. There are quite a few who would build in that range, there are many small hand builders that would welcome an order in that range. You can also buy the wood yourself and bring it over..... or maybe a maple fell in your yard! I am waiting for a maple or black walnut tree to provide me with a guitar one day.... how wonderful would that be? If it's dried enough a luthier can make the back and sides from it. I know someone who did this with a maple in his yard, gorgeous instrument.
# Posted on September 1st 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Some points above are worth responding to:
I wouldn't counsel anyone to go w/ Brazilian Rosewood, unless you're a collector and you pay extra into some kind of conservation fund. BR has been on the protected species lists for a while, and the BR coming into luthiers' hands now is stump wood. SR is fine in the right hands, but you're paying more for the mystique of BR than anything. I'm not convinced that the tonality is worth the extra cost (and it can be half the price of a new handmade instrument). Some of the alternative woods are both gorgeous in sound and appearance--cocobolo is a good candidate, and I love the sound of mahogany guitars.
A good luthier is more likely to scallop at least some braces than not, and the best "voice" their guitars by variations in the thickness of the top and braces. A heavily-built guitar (no scalloping) will be strong and able to be played hard with medium or heavy strings, but a lightly-built guitar will be more sonorous and louder for less effort, although you can't string it with heavy strings. The best luthiers will build the instrument to your playing style with variations on the thickness of the top and bracing, whereas the bigger production shops tend to build their instruments on the heavy side so as to reduce the chance of a guitar coming back for repair work (e.g., bridge pulling up, warping, etc.). (I have to wonder if Foley builds his guitars with small, unscalloped braces vs. large scalloped ones.)
Another factor to consider is that you can have old or used guitars revoiced. I had two braces on my Santa Cruz OM shaved down by an experienced luthier, and it really made a significant impact on the sound of my guitar. It was hard to believe that it could sound better, but it really does. This can be done to old guitars (and probably should for many of them). As far as "breaking in" goes, a new guitar will settle in and open up as a function of how much it's played. If it's a good brand with good materials and workmanship, it will improve with age and playing--and if you don't care for it, you can have it revoiced (this is done with fiddles all the time), or you can sell it.
I think that in the end, unless you know exactly what you want in a handmade guitar, it's probably best to stay with a known brand so if and when you trade up, you don't lose its value. Santa Cruz OM PWs are some of the best affordable handmade guitars going, and the size is perfect for ITM. But each to his own.
# Posted on September 1st 2006 by Audeamus
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
I agree on the Brazilian, I know (Ed) Foley has some real old stock ... he will also do the braces anyway you want or according to the sounbd you want, and some he has revoiced later. Some will just thin the brace rather than scallop too. His back braces are pretty big and more of a bowl created. He scalloped on a guitar for me (not made by him) and improved the tone a lot.
What I mean is that you can say you ultimately want this or that quality of sound, not tell the builder to scallop or not, they should know. I knew if I didn't get the sound I liked we could scallop afterwards.
I recently saw an Oregon myrtlewood guitar that was really nice too, that's not so pricey either.
i think it's nice to have at least one really great guitar custom or not that suits you, and one easy to play and decent sounding knocker, that you don't care if someone you let use at a session give it a ding or pours beer on it.
The Brazilian, I hear you can't cut it anymore, you have to get a tree that fell on its own and they are airlifted out. The honduran to my ear and eye is every bit as good. Depends too, there can be a bad cut of this or that, like I mentioned I have played Indian up against brazilian and liked the Indian guitar better. The Indian rosewood is really nice too, there is this mytique about Brazilian and they price it accordingly..... It certainly isn't worth a few thousand extra to my ears, though may be to some. One of my favorites is a walnut OM. It's got the warmth and depth you'd expect from rosewood.
# Posted on September 1st 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Braz rosewood is definitely a wonderful tonewood, but will usually cost you $Thousands extra. And it still might not be the sound that YOU want.
As Iris said, walnut is a great tonewood. Every walnut guitar I've played had a very nice voice. So far, my impression is that it tends to sound somewhere between rosewood and mahogany. I think the main reason we don't see many commercial walnut guitars is just appearance - it's not as striking as rosewood and not as comfortably familiar as mahagony.
One of my luthier buddies has had oak back and sides put together for years, but keeps putting off finishing it. That'll be an interesting experiment. I don't think I've ever met an oak guitar, but I've heard of a couple that allegedly sound great.
# Posted on September 2nd 2006 by Bob himself
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Figured Claro Walnut.... incredibly beautiful, undulates when polished, like a waterfall..... amazing, I think a nice piece is more striking than any rosewood.
Nice warm sound, not as deep as Brazilian or other rosewoods, just perfect balance in my ears!
# Posted on September 2nd 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Does the choice of wood for the back and sides have that much effect on the tone? Given the fact that they're damped against the player's body and can't vibrate, can it make that much difference to the sound? I would have thought the bigger issue would be the bracing, cutaway (if it has one) etc? Or does mahogany have a different strength (per mm thickness) to rosewood, so you need more (or less)? Just interested, I don't make guitars.
# Posted on September 3rd 2006 by Andy V
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
The top is the most important, but I have consistently heard more depth and resonance from rosewoods than mahogony. So it you want bright and out there sound mahogony is better. More brittle, less warm, and you don't maybe always want warm and deep sound.... so you have to have many, LOL! at least that's my excuse!
There are many other factors too though besides bracing, and I am no expert yet, having just made three, but things like body depth will add warmth and deep tone too. I heard one mahogony Dread made by Ed Foley that was deep bodied, with a very thin top of engleman and eyes closed would have taken it for rosewood. But for the generic built models, the standard OMs, 000s, Dreads compared one against the other, I can pick rosewood as opposed to mahogany eyes closed pretty much most of the time.
Walnut is a little different, somewhere in the middle. Best of both worlds, really cheap most of the time, and a pretty wood. The top makes the biggest difference though, which is why many laminate back and side guitars sound so good too. Not sure what wood is used consistently in between the veneers but it sure isn't Brazilian. I'll have to find out, just curious, maybe some cheap grade mahogony or something. Interesting question. I don't plan on building any laminates so never gave it a thought.
# Posted on September 5th 2006 by irisnevins
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
I don't think that the choice of wood for the sides and back are as critical as to whether they're solid or plywood. Yes, some ply-sided guitars can sound pretty good if the top is a good one (I have a classical guitar w/ a cedar top and beautiful ply sides and back that sounds great), but an all-solid wood instrument will more likely sound better over time than a ply instrument.
That said, I think most luthiers would say that the choice of woods for the back and sides is fairly influential on the final tone of the instrument, and that the dimensions, quality, and distribution of braces and the quality and thickness of the top are the major determinants of both tone and volume. However, larger is not always better. I would choose the dimensions of my instrument based on its intended use--that is, a smaller guitar tends to blend in well in a parlor-like acoustic setting, whereas a larger guitar would sound good among louder instruments and settings. But ultimately, each to his or her own. There are few hard and fast rules in the guitar world!
# Posted on September 6th 2006 by Audeamus
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
I've played literally hundreds of mahogany and rosewood guitars - enough to conclude that there's a fairly consistent difference. But the other things mentioned above - body shape and size, bracing, top thickness, top wood, etc. - usually make a bigger difference.
# Posted on September 8th 2006 by Bob himself
Re: Hand-made vs. "name" guitars, new vs. old
Hi
I've been away for a while and have just read through all the responses briefly - thanks a million to all who responded to my original post and in such detail!!
To those of you who asked - what's wrong with my (Joe) Foley guitars? Nothing, is the answer. Sometimes you get used to an instrument and fancy a change, there's also the Nirvana syndrome where you are looking for the ultimate guitar.
I've been through the "design your own guitar" stage - Joe built one to my specifications (spruce top, Brazilian rosewood back and sides) and it's a lovely guitar, but for ITM my original Foley (built 1988) is still unsurpassed. It just reaches places other guitars don't (particularly in its bass response). The truth is I am spoilt - my "other" acoustic guitar is a Guild D30 which is pretty nice too!!
Thanks again for all your posts...
# Posted on September 14th 2006 by lysaghtm